ML20067D442

Requests That Proprietary Version of Presentation Matls from 940223-24 Meeting on AP600 Pccs Tests & Analysis Be Withheld from Public Disclosure Per 10CFR2.790

ML20067D442
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	02/23/1994
From:	Liparulo N WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:	Borchardt R NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML19304A009	List: ML20067D442 NRC-94-4067, Forwards Nonproprietary & Proprietary Versions of Presentation Matls Used During 940223-24 Meeting in Monroeville,Pa on AP600 Pccs Tests & Analysis.Proprietary Version of Matl Withheld,Per 10CFR9.17(a)(4)
References
AW-94-594, NUDOCS 9403080226
Download: ML20067D442 (100)

Text

L-

\

1 Westinghouse Energy Systems em 355 Pittsburp Peam,ylvama 15230 0355 Electric Corporation AW-94-594 February 23,1994 Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION: MR. R. W. BORCHARDT APPLICATION FOR WITHHOLDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE j SUBJECI': PRESENTATION MATERIALS FROM THE FEBRUARY 23-24,1994 MEETING ON AP600 PCCS TESTS AND ANALYSIS

Dear Mr. Borchardt:

The application for withholding is submitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse")

pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(1) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations. It contains commercial strategic information proprietary to Westinghouse and customarily held in confidence.

The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested is identified in the proprietary version of the subject report. In conformance with 10CFR Section 2.790, Affidavit AW-94-594 accompanies this application for withholding setting forth the basis on which the identified proprietary information may be withheld from public disclosure.

Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the subject information which is proprietary to Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations.

Correspondence with respect to this application for withholding or the accompanying affidavit should reference AW-94-594 and should be addressed to the undersigned.

Very truly yours, i

XYhp &

• N. J. Liparulo, Manager Nuclear Safety And Regulatory Activities

/nja ec: Kevin Bohrer NRC 12H5 9403000226 940223 PDR ADOCK 05200003 f A PDR 2 $

1 I

1 AW-94-594 AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:

ss COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY:

Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Brian A. McIntyre, who, being by me duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit on behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse") and that the averments of fact set forth in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief:

s/ -

A N .,

Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Sworn to and subscribed before me this c28 day i of * .1994

(/ 1 9.td Notary Public racec mat Rose Mane Payr ' try PEc Mon rm Esa4 fjrn) Ccuaty th Commson L,#nMov 4.17K2 Member Per.nsytvarsa Assocklaon at retanes 1529A

l AW-94-594 (1) I am Manager, Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing, in the Advanced Technology Business l Area, of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, I have been specifically delegated '

the function of reviewing the proprietary information sought to be withheld from public disclosure in connection with nuclear power plant licensing and rulemaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit.

i l

(2) I am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in conjunction with the Westinghouse application for withholding accompanying this Affidavit.

l (3) I have personal knowledge of the criteria and procedures utilized by the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit in designating information as a trade secret, privileged or as confidential commercial or financial information.

(4) Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining

whether the information sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be withheld.

l (i) 'Ihe information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by Westinghouse.

(ii) The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public. Westinghouse has a rational basis for determining the types of information customarily held in confidence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of information in confidence. The application of that system and the substance of that system constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required.

i Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of I several types, the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows:

I I

15:9A l

c . _

J AW.94-594 (a) The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, l l

structure, tool, method, etc.) where prevention of its use by any of Westinghouse's competitors without license from Westinghouse constitutes a i l

competitive economic advantage over other companies. 1 l

(b) It consists of supporting data, including test data, relative to a process (or  ;

I component, structure, tool, method, etc.), the application of which data secures a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability.

(c) Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product.

(d) It reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or suppliers.

(c) It reveals aspects of past, present, or future Westinghouse or customer funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to Westinghouse.

(f) It contains patentable ideas, for which patent protection may be desirable.

There are sound policy reasons behind the Westinghouse system which include the j following: l I

(a) The use of such information by Westinghouse gives Westinghouse a competitive advantage over its competitors. It is, therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.

(b) It is information which is marketable in many ways. The extent to which such information is available to competitors diminishes the Westinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the information.

1529A

AW-94-594 (c) Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a competitive disadvantage by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.

(d) Each component of proprietary information pertinent to a particular competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the total competitive advantage if competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.

(e) Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a market advantage to the competition of those countries.

(f) The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.

The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence and, under the l (iii) ,

provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the l Commission.

(iv) The information sought to be protected is not available in public sources or available information has not been previously employed in the same original manner or method to the best of our knowledge and belief.

(v) Enclosed is Letter NTD-NRC-94-4067, February 23,1994, being transmitted by l Westinghouse Electric Corporation (.W) letter and Application for Withholding Proprietary Information from Public Disclosure, N. J. Liparulo (LV), to Mr. R. W. Borchardt, Office of NRR. The proprietary information as submitted for use by Westinghouse Electric Corporation is in response to questions conceming the AP600 plant and the associated design certification application and is expected to be applicable in other licensee submittals in response to certain NRC requirements for justification of licensing advanced nuclear power plant designs.

1529A

AW-94-594 This information is part of that which will enable Westinghouse to:

(a) Demonstrate the design and safety of the AP600 Passive Safety Systems.

(b) Establish applicable verification testing methods.

(c) Design Advanced Nuclear Power Plants that meet NRC requirements.

(d) Establish technical and licensing approaches for the AP600 that will ultimately result in a certified design.

(e) Assist customers in obtaining NRC approval for future plants.

Further this information has substantial commercial value as follows:

(a) Westinghouse plans to sell the use of similar information to its customers for purposes of meeting NRC requirements for advanced plant licenses.

(b) Westinghouse can sell support and defense of the technology to its customers l

in the licensing process.

1 i Public disclosure of this proprietary information is likely to cause substantial harm to l

the competitive position of Westinghouse because it would enhance the ability of competitors to provide similar advanced nuclear power designs and licensing defense services for commercial power reactors without commensurate expenses. Also, public disclosure of the information would enable others to use the information to meet NRC requirements for licensing documentation without purchasing the right to use the information.

l The development of the technology described in part by the information is the result of l

l applying the results of many yeam of experience in an intensive Westinghouse effort

! and the expenditure of a considerable sum ol money.

1 l

!$20A

. = - . . - - - . . .. _ _ . . . - _ _ , _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

AW-94-594 i 1

in order for competitors of Westinghouse to duplicate this inforrnation, similar technical programs would have to be performed and a significant manpower effort, l

having the requisite talent and experience, would have to be expended for developing analytical methods and receiving NRC approval for those methods.

Further the deponent sayeth not.

1 l

l l

\

1529A I

==u ig WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION -

PRESENTATION TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AP600 PCCS Tests and Analysis (Part 1 - 2/23/94)

MONROEVILLE. PA FEBRUARY 23-74,1994

pr,qg AGENDA 1, . . !'

WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING AP600 PCCS TEST AND ANALYSIS February 23,1994 1:00 Welcome and Introduction J. Gresham 1:15 WGOTHlC Validation Process Overview J. Woodcock 2:00 NRC Perspective (PCCS Test and Analysis issues) C. Hoxie 2:45 PCCS Test Results Overview F. Peters

l l

==q AGENDA _

WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING AP600 PCCS TEST AND ANALYSIS February 24,1994 8:00 Phenomenological Modeling Status D. Spencer Lunch 1:00 WGOTHIC Model Changes M. Kennedy 1:30 WGOTHIC Validation Status M. Kennedy 2:15 PCCS Test Analysis RAI Summary M. Kennedy 3:00 NRC Consultation 4:00 Meeting Wrap-up, Discussion of Action items All

i i

_ i i

s i

M i _

. s

. i s

y l

._ a n

N rA O

I el ga ac ni g

._ T a Mlo C ,i o

U md aa D hR s d O e r n Ga R .t T Ane N J mn

. I i a

t

_ n o

C

]

I l

WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW J. Woodcock Containment and Radiological Analysis I

Pum]

WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW -

SESSION AGENDA WGOTHIC Licensing Submittal Status WCAP Revision 0 Bases WCAP Revision 1 Enhancements

- Overview of Plans for Containment Code Validation and SSAR Confirmation Analysis

- Blind Test Analysis Plans

- WGOTHIC Licensing Review Status

- WGOTHIC Code Validation Status

- ai _

m _

e n

- a p _

S U _

T A

- T S r e n L f o A  : s i t

s n a W

E T

T e

s a r

u q

I I

a t e

V M B t a

B e m R U

)

0 sh l s u d E S n t a t n e V G o se an l

n r e d s O N i

s t r e m i

v e I

S i

v ne t n o or s

S e otx i m p y

N R i

t e t l

a S E a r u o

f o e n E C R s o r a

A nf h n e C

I L e t o w 0 S s ds i

O C S t s ns sst w i t

a 0 n o

R I

o e "t 0 H & e t l

u 6 i s

P T ( t cte ss P i O 0 l

a ntaTT ee m A v N G r i r o e _

n g sl o R _

o nPee O W i s t e o l l aa f

r t

n R I

n c acc t

e A T i v i slF SS t

e o A e d i i

t S _

D R n a Wel l ag e m a

a c S r

ouma f s r r i I

L P s a l

p o A t y oSL p p f

A C c e t h s g "l e d a i s

V i

W f n e s f

e r eirl na i p

d n a C

I C

I e i vs ge t

es m a b s

H H t a n et a u g a T

T O

r a UWInB l d i l

n d O G p e a e e s c s G W S - - - - U S U W - - - - -

pr,q~

WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW . ..

WGOTHIC LICENSING SUBMITTAL STATUS (continued)

WCAP-13246 is Being Revised

- SSAR Revision 0 models are sufficient to conservatively assess containment criteria for AP600

- RAl's requested additional information Method of presentation of material

- Discussion of other areas of potential concern

- Extend integral test database Helium as additional noncondensible Measure condensate collection at various locations Add transient tests

- Reduce the small remaining uncertainty Improved formulation of code conservation equations

- Further increase the accuracy of heat / mass transfer correlations

- Additional noding studies to improve noncondensible predictions

ll!!T~9l WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW E .l WGOTHIC LICENSING SUBMITTAL STATUS (continued)

WGOTHIC WCAP Revision 1 Enhancements

- More accurate correlations including additional separate effects tests from the literature

- Distributed parameter (" subdivided") for internal volumes

- LST Confirmatory Tests Helium addition and Transients with blowdowns

- Address feedback from NRC/ACRS meetings

- Will lead to confirmation of SSAR Revision 0 conclusions

pmtammig WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW _

Overview of Containment Code Validation and SSAR Confirmation Analyses SSAR Rev 0 NE M Contrm SSAR Rev. 0 Containment = E Rev

= Romain - -eI .

Document .

Response Vatd Results Receive NRC final SER on

--e SSAR Containment PCCS Phenom

• ~ Response Modois & Scagng WGOTHIC Phase 2 = T ~~

WCAP Rev. W Scale . p j 0 Baseline Tests LST Phase 2 y + -

Anaeyses to Connem SSAR & Model Hz O

Configure __

BHndTest Analysis WGOTHIC And Report

+ _

s

!!!mimmittj WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW -

Blind Test Analysis Plans Submit WGOTHIC t.ST Phase 2 WCAP Rev. 0

• Analyses to Cor*m -O lesue WGOTHIC WCAP Rev 1 -

Baselme Computer SSAR & Model Hr Receive NRC final SER on

-e SSAR Contamment r , Response T Post test Bend pamme evahimpon Test ConAgure --

- 4 WGOTHIC

• dM

• Repost (Intomal Report) w >

!!! meg WGOTHIC VALIDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW _

WGOTHIC LICENSING REVIEW STATUS RAls on WGOTHIC WCAP Revision 0 Received: 15

- RAls on SSAR Revision 0 Containment Analysis Received: 1

l llllllMt!!

WGOTHIC VAllDATION PROCESS OVERVIEW _

WGOTHIC CODE VALIDATION STATUS All PCCS tests completed, LST quick look reports being issued

- WCAP Revision 1 Code and Validation Enhancements underway Improve accuracy Further reduce uncertainty

- Understand sensitivities to key calculational parameters

- Provide additional documentation supporting scalability of models and methods for use of code

- Confirmation of AP600 SSAR conclusions for containment will be based on final LST and calculation results

- Early identification of issues / concerns is necessary for us to factor them into our plans with minimal impact

a___Aga mi..gAhm_d 4mgh b L _e4 4ra,& 4e- h W as .h4 n _hm _A A 4 s _& _ dhwAM W_um-%4Aa h.=As6 amen 9. 6 u -E - 6 JL AahAh.4&4" 4&4.h & AC4. A 4 4 h M AM.Ga4B=.1,.4,- 4 &hSm.4.u h om .. .A 4Aa_%.a&__._,.u 6 m..a.4 2.4 +% aAm_m.Am__.nem__k.A4 4maa as a& A mis 4. hi &_ h 4 a _h J.-

_y

=

a_mw--

PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW F. E. Peters Test Engineering

girli!

PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW , . /;

AP600 TEST PROGRAM OVERVIEW TESTING

'I ES I' DESCRIFI' ION CATEGORY STATUS TEST PURPOSE PASNI\ E CtINTAINhlENT COUI.ING SYSTEh! TESTS IN SUPPORT OF AP600 DESIGN Aii I: low Path Delta P Test Basic Research Completed Obtain pressure drop data ihnmgh the downcinner and annulus W ate 1 ihn I:inmation Test Basic Research Completed Confinn wettability of coated steel surface IIcated Pl.ite Test Basic Research Completed Confirm PCCS heat transfer capability llenth Wmd Tunnel Experiment Basic Research Completed Assess ef fcces of wind on shield building design (intet/ outlet location)

Condensation Tests - Bare surface upward Basic Research Completed Comparison with past separate cifects tests Condensation Tests - Bare surface downward Basic Research Completed Obtain heat transfer coefficients with downward f acing surfaces Condensation Tests - Painted smiace down Basic Research Completed Obtain the effect of AIWM) paint on heat transler perform.mce Condensation Tests - l_ight noncondensibles Basic Research Completed Obtain the effect of light noncondensibles on llT perloonance comlensation Tests - Stagnation Flow Conditions Basic Research Completed Obtain the llT perfonnance under stagnant flow conditions Comiensation Tests Stagnation / light noncondensibles Basic Research Completed Obtain the heat transfer perhmnance under stagnant flow conditions in the presence of light rumcimdensibles Condensation Tests - 2D condensation Basic Research In Progress Measure condensation llT coefTicient usmg 2D test molei

- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - . __ - -_--m___._____m ___ __-__. _

nen=

!M PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW =

AP600 TEST PROGRAM OVERVIEW TESTING TEST DESCHil'IlON CATEGORY STATUS TEST PURPOSE PANNIVE CONTAINMENT COOL.ING SYSTEM TESTS IN SUPPORT OF AP600 IDESIGN CERTIFICATION Integral om.dl scale) Tests - Pluse I (Feasibility) Safety Related Completed Determine feasibility of water enhanced cont. coohng sysicin Integral tsnull scale) Tests - P!tne 2A (Extension Tests) Safety Related Completed Demonstrate operation of PCCS over increased range of operatinF conditions. Confirm PCCS intened and etternal llT capabilities Integral bnnll scale) Tests - Phase 2B (Continuation Safety Related C<nnpleted Demonstrate operatiim of Passive Containment Cicling Sysicm Test s ) with pnxotypic steam injection I/Mih Scale'lleat Transfer Test - I'hase 1 (Baseline) Safety Related Completed Obtain llT data for WGOTillC validation with minimal intervals 1/Sth Scale lleat Transler Test - Phase 2 (Confirmatory) Safety Related Completed Obtain IIT data for WGOTillC computer code validatiim Water l>ntnbution System Test - Phase I (21) 1: Safety Related Completed InvestiFate performance of passive containment coohng system Dumeteri center water delivery / distribution device W ate Distobution System Test - Phase 2 (1/Sth Sector) Safety Related Completed Measure containment water coverage using distribution system Waier Dninbniion Ssstem Test - Phase 1 (I/8th sector Safety Related Completed Measure containment water coverage using seletted ilesign with seletted dninbution system) distributiim system Winil 'lunnel 'lest - Pluse 1 Salcty Related Completed Investigate wind sensitivity of shield buihling design Wmil ~1 unnel Test Ph.ne 2 Safety Related Completed Assess wind loads on containment halfle Wmil 'lunnel ~lest - Phase 4 A Safety Related Completed Verify Phase I & 2 test results at higher Reynolds numbers Win.1 Tunnel Test Pluse 4B Safety Relateil Counpleted Investigate site topography effetts on air flow thnmgh PCS annulus

n m=nny PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW --

OBJECTIVES Examine, on a large scale, containment phenomena:

Natural convection and steam condensation on the interior of the containment Exterior air and water heat removal For use in validation of containment analysis computer codes

1 9"

=

=

)

x a

m c

e s

r e

p l

- e n

. n a

h l

e m c s t e 6 s s y 2 e s c (

v e ,

t s

y s m e

l p /

t f y t e

t p l s d u 0 p y e s g 2 p s t

n o u n n m t s o W

E e a e

i l

o g m

i t

. I m t o n l i

s V u s c i l

i f i u

R t r

g r o r q E s i i

a o e c V n s c t a a i

p n r O 0 0 o o w a S 0 i i

r r t 6 0 t c e o a T P 1

e t i r d L v x e A

U h r

n e t e

x

. S e / o r n E Y l b c i

a e n R T a l a

I c 0 l

a d m h T L I

s 0 r e p c S C " 0, u c g E t r 0 T A '8/ 0 a o 0 0 F 1 1 N F 3 4 S

T C S C E - - - - - -

P T

m..m. mmmi PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW _

Test Facility Configuration I -Entuust ran Dutte t T/C's Located by - 49 g MDette P Cettl Equet Circunf erentw Arees veter !>strabute system W fDif f usee i

Portatde Anemometer for Traverseg e

Traversmg T/C e

Portable For Treverswg A-tees 4

J L l ces so-P l mN i a freverswg f /C's lsteen Gerwrator Mossrt p ireneparent Serfte e \ ste.a w ees, Flos Area Portable Anemoneteem For* TreversWQ g LOOP CO"D8F' "*"t* {

W etene Dec % U remed Intet T/C M_ve5$_5_pr"*' _

_ q_ _ _ _ __ __ ___

'Open* Valuae  %

G=* -e e-<w vemwe an

\ eem 1t bippetapa Lee l Steen Flow Meter l

[Hetae Inyction l

m =tma

!H PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW -

instrument Rake Locations

_ - 9,c) m

_ _ - _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ _-__ i_____-________-______._______-__.____._

. . . . = . - - - . _ - - . . - . - - - . - . . _ - - - . . . . - . - . . - - - _ . _.

mat = ###

1 PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW _

Condensate Collection Systems e 4=

D

= G '

, 7, l

i b

j g__

g I

I' E- - ,

I.

M M %WP M

=

C_ _a

^

M.

r~~~ ;m- "

W i

,- pf ~ k n D2 gg v m F

T j 8er=== W m = r 9mw O mumme veemmt O N

• art =r

=

j PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW --

BASELINE TESTS - COMPLETED Steady state heat transfer tests Report issued (WCAP-13566)

PHASE 2 TESTS - EXTEND DATA BASE - COMPLETED Steady state and transient simulations

- Effect of light noncondensibles Internal heat sinks

- Quick look reports issued (PCS-T2R-014,-015,-017,-018,-022,-023)

- Blind blowdown test (Test description report PCS-T2R-020)

l me?qg l PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW -

PRE-TESTS Cold helium distribution

- Video tape delayed water distribution Air flow vessel cold (~100 F)

Establish water distribution control levels PHASE 3 TESTS - FOLLOW-ON - COMPLETED Stepped blowdown steam discharge

- Alternate steam discharge Vacuum Pressurized vessel

e s -

o

. v

\ ~l 1

l I

I 1

i i

(

l 1

1 1

i j

. W W

, O l

i l-

! _J r CD W

T t 3 I 4 b W

H

W

O l i

O 1 0.,

i  ?

8 1i I

W T

W 0

(O

. .J D

(D W

E F

CO W

H r .

(O O

O CL i

o

???m! J.

.. U

.ll.

i i

2::

l r

l W

E ,

W

> l O

(n F-

_.I D

Ch W 1 i

W b .

en I W

F-Ch O i i O

CL I i

im--m ja

~

PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW -

OVERVIEW OF TEST RESULTS Comparison of heat loss calculations

- Nominal heat transfer performance Helium behavior Annulus air flow Other observations

l.. , I !llllll

g n

=

=

m

_ m.

)

b ,

a

(

s _.

t e

a R _

l _

a -

v -

o _

m e

R t _

a e _

H .

t -

_ s

_ e _

W E

T e

_ l I

a V c R S e

_ E g V r a

O L S

T L

U S

E R -

T ~

S E

T S

C C

P

l' il"'

a

.

:: l t o X

3 .

O u.

t O

E D o

b Z n O -

a c C m

3 a g a u

. a

> m w C

d L D

> o o o W C W e

T W C

3

/ o B ,o -

t m

J

w s .

W l

> e . m C a R w W h " W

> , issl 0 lif 58$ $l \

M a 3, ,I E a H.; > I j

. < - --p l

") $

M .!! E l E $k C

• o p 00 o

U) l LLJ o o o o o o o

o" H a o o o o o o o o o o l m W r

@ LD LA T l O 1 O CEv1.4vJL4)/naq) lVA0W3d IV3H 39Vd3AV a.

1

1

mmming PCCS TEST RESUi_TS OVERVIEW -

OBSERVATIONS:

- Heat removal rates show consistent results with multiple calculation methods Tests produce repeatable results

- Heat removal rates are linear with pressure 5

i l

l n= : :

I

l l_l e

l L I

\ L l

! .N*

N G

H G

N vi

.U.)

N G

1 O

bem O

l 3 N

.C b_

> .e T em W

> 8 o =

C 1

\

U) h F- c

, ,,J O

") z U)

W  !

W \

F-  !

U)

W F-U) , /

O 1 O l 1

tp - ":j

.e q PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW . ,

Effects of Long Term Heat Sinks

- (a,b)

WMM PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW -

Effects of Cooling Water on Noncondensible Gas Distribution (a,b)

m nig PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW OBSERVATIONS:

Helium becomes well mixed in all cases

- Helium mixing is slower with no water cooling

- Helium distribution becomes uniform throughout the vessel faster with water cooling

- Little effect on helium distribution was noted from the addition of long term heat sinks Sampling system shows consistent behavior and provides a suitable technique for determination of noncondensible measurements Strong noncondensible stratification observed particularly below operating deck

!!!!D"THi!l PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW I, '

Effect of External Air Flow on Average Heat Removal Rate n 6000 n, 9 Natural Co nvection Air F low g O 9 ft/sec A ir Flows w y 16 ft/sec Air Flow

[ 5000 7 c

v e

3 y 4000 0 'O g 3000

/

a cr H 2000 O Regression of Nomi 1al Flux Data

$ 1000

, 5 3 0 20 30 40 50 60 VESSEL PRESSURE (psia)

PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW OBSERVATIONS:

Air velocity has a small but noticeable effect on heat removal rates

- Smoke tests with vessel at ~100 F show strong upward flow Very little effect of 50% air flow blockage

mmmmg PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW OTHER OBSERVATIONS:

- Approximately 95% of the condensate is collected from the vessel dome and sidewall

- 5% is collected from the open, closed, steam generator and rainfall areas

- Condensate approximately equally divided between dome and side wall No observable rainfall (below detection limits)

Internal velocities observed are low (0 to 5 ft/sec)

l mmmmmg

! PCCS TEST RESULTS OVERVIEW __

l l

CONCLUSIONS:

Consistent test data Air stratifies within containment Helium mixes well inside the test vessel

- 95% of the condensate is removed above the operating deck No rainfall observed

lll;!r iilll WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION h.'

PRESENTATION TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AP600 PCCS Tests and Analysis (Part 2 - 2/24/94)

MONROEVILLE, PA FEBRUARY 23-24,1994

ph-uy AGENDA WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING AP600 PCCS TEST AND ANALYSIS February 23,1994 1:00 Welcome and introduction J. Gresham 1:15 WGOTHIC Validation Process Overview J. Woodcock 2:00 NRC Perspective (PCCS Test and Analysis issues) C. Hoxie 2:45 PCCS Test Results Overview F. Peters

meeg AGENDA -

WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING AP600 PCCS TEST AND ANALYSIS February 24,1994 8:00 Phenomenological Modeling Status D. Spencer Lunch 1:00 WGOTHIC Model Changes M. Kennedy 1:30 WGOTHIC Validation Status M. Kennedy 2:15 PCCS Test Analysis RAI Summary M. Kennedy 3:00 NRC Consultation 4:00 Meeting Wrap-up, Discussion of Action items All

!!!iN5l l

PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODELING STATUS Part 1: Containment Analysis Approach Part 2: Response to Questions from March 1993 NRC PCCS Meeting at STC D. R. Spencer Containment and Radiological Analysis

I

= :::: ,,

~

Part 1: Containment Analysis Approach

1. Specify the phenomena to be modeled.

I II. Select analytically valid models.

Ill. Verify scalability of models:

1. Determine range of relevant AP600 dimensionless groups.

2. Collect separate effects data sets and perform comparisons.

IV. Perform verification of models with WGOTHIC.

V. Determine the effect of hydrogen and transients on the models.

VI. Validate AP600 modeling assumption on external wetted coverage (Part 2).

i - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

manag

1. PHENOMENA TO BE MODELED -

1. Liquid film: heat transfer, enthalpy transport and stability.

2. Convective heat transfer: with, without mass transfer

3. Mass transfer: condensation, evaporation

4. Jets and Plumes: velocity fields, transport /entrainment

5. Entrance effects for heat and mass transfer in channels

6. Internal mixing / stratification of steam-air-hydrogen

$li~iiWi!

.r b 4~ '

II. SELECT MODELS #.

1.0 Convective Heat Transfer 1.1 EXTERNAL 1.2 INTERNAL The McAdamsD3 turbulent free convection heat The McAdams turbulent free convection heat transfer correlation: transfer correlation:

(3) Nu,,,, = 0.13(Gr,Pr)"' 0)

Nu,,,, = 0.13(Gr,Pr)"'

and the Colh;rn3 turbulent forced convection heat and the smooth flat platePI turbulent forced transfer em s, tion: convection heat transfer correlation:

(1) (M Nu,,. = 0.02 3Ra-l'Pr "' Nu,,,, = 0.0246Re-lPr "'

are used for the external conver te heat transfer to are used for the internal convective heat transfer to or from the surfaces. or from the surfaces.

1.3 COMBINED FREE AND FORCED The correlations for combined free and forced convection heat transfer from Churchill"I are, for opposed free and forced convection:

i5>

Nu = (Nu,',, +Nu,' , )"'

and for assisting free and forced convection, he is the larger of the following three expressions:

a hM Nuf ,',,- N,l.,, )"' . 0.75Nup ,, , 0.75Nug ,. W The lower limit in the latter equation, which prevents the value of Nuc from going to zero when Nu,,, and Nu,,c are equal, comes from Eckert and Diaguila"3

mm=gg

11. SELECT MODELS (continued) 2.0 Mass Transfer The mass transfer correlation is derived from the heat transfer correlation using the heat and mass transfer analogy:

< vn Sh = Nu 1g (1)

?>

The resulting mass transfer coefficient, h,,,, from the Sherwood number definition:

Sh =

(Ni D,.

is multiplied by a correction factor,0, to account for the effect of mass transfer. (The mass transfer correction is discussed in Part 2).

3.0 Liquid Film Heat Transfer The Chun and Seban'l t correlation for wavy laminar films was selected for use in the WGOTHIC code. The _

dimensionless correlation for the film Nusselt number is:

Nu = 0.822 Re - 2: (9) where Nu = Y and Re = ? ( III >

A g sin (0) p

ii==j ~

11. SELECT MODELS (continued) _

4.0 Liquid Film Enthalpy Transport The liquid film enthalpy transport model solves the transient energy equation at a point at the center of the liquid film for each clime:

BT dT' , g 3T gg,y pc'

(

7,wE, at' where x is normal to the surface and z is parallel to the surface. The energy equation is coupled to the wall and the liquid film surface by the equations:

BT'd RT'" BT^'" + 4," + 4 ",,,

(l2)

A ,, =

k,,, / and = Q,',',

c' i .. , <l t .. ,

Af ,, di . ..,,

5.0 Entrance Effect The average value of h(x) between x, and x,is:

h,,.s p' d(x2 -x,') (13) h., L 3(x,-x,)

The multipliers F, are the coefficients recommended by Boelter, Young and Iversonm to account for the entrance effect:

h

__.'" = 1 + F,.d (14) h L

M=j

11. SELECT MODELS (continued) -

References:

1. W. H. McAdams, Heat Transmission, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill,1954.

2. A. P. Colburn, "A Method of Correlating Forced Convection Heat Transfer Data and a Comparison With Fluid Friction", Transactions of the AIChE, Vol. 29 (1933), p.174.

3. H. Schlichting, Boundary layer Theory, Sixth Edition, McGraw-Hill.

4. S. W. Churchill, " Combined free and Forced Convection Around immersed Bodies",

Section 2.5.9, and " Combined Free and Forced Convection in Channels", Section 2.5.10 in E. U . Schlunder, Ed.-in-Chief, Heat Exchanger Design Handbook, Hemisphere Publishing Corp.1983.

5. E. R. G. Eckert and A. J. Diaguila, " Convective Heat Transfer for Mixed, Free, and Forced Flow Through Tubes", Transactions of the ASME, May,1954, pp 497-504.

6. R. K. R. Chun and R. A. Seban, " Heat Transfer to Evaporating Liquid Films", Journal of Heat Transfer, November,1971, pp 391-396.

7. L. M. K. Boelter, G. Young and H. W. Iverson, NACA TN 1451,1948.

111. VERIFY SCALABILITY OF MODELS

1. Determine Range of Relevant AP600 Dimensionless Groups -

(a, b)

)

l" 1

5, 8

a

( -

8 1

1~ D. -

l r 7 t

e 2 db 4 5 s n a - l am -

n .

r 6 7 aae e r u 7 t n r t

e PN 1 1

oa z

m ier _

a o c a _

r hf r a a e 0 eu P n d i

1 0 hs f it a S 8 0, t r

o r rl e a 7- a 1 he t f e o bc 9 n 2- i s .

g p a mtr i

6 0 wn _

n v ue 1 2 s a a E 3 et r NV e R s r

g a t

s 0 d e e 0 l oe d h n 6 P nm '5 7a l

) o A yo 3 5t o d

e s eD 2 3- a a f t -

u i

r n R r n n o e n a p

i s e 2 3 eh t i v 3 l

g f t

m m O n

o l

no a

o i

F

(

c C d i

n%

a6 m u s2 S r 1 q l t e r

1 0 er L f o e i

L dn b 4- 2- a k o a a E am l

r b r n e a o r u 1 9 mer D P T f

s PN 1 1 c

ea O d r e ae M n t fr c a e uf a m e s r u F t s a r

a n di es O S e

P a i s

n S 3 9 1 me dom rl 1 a Y a g e ea bc 2- 5-8 n o n d 0 T t ed i

a i l n mt r 4 hl I

D a o ue t a

L c C NV ot o I

s S t B t s l t .

c d e ae _

A e mh l

om f r t

n L f E yo 9 9 of A eD 7 1

5- a n

no e Rr 1

- e%

C t a e v

0 0 4 h0 S r a O- h t

7 p n co Y s t

s it F e e t s a h g I

S T e b e w n e T S i

R

. t t c n adn e la E l c is d n n opo S n V a l

o 0 e o i

t s C 0 g c n ae cr 6 s u 1

P r

a i h o ro

'L 1

1 2 A L W C c

pr ug

111. VERIFY SCALABILITY OF MODELS .. .

2. Collect Separate Effects Data Sets and Perform Comparisons: Data Comparisons (a,t) i l

'O l

l

p::::=:::g

=

IV. PERFORM VERIFICATION OF MODELS WITH WGOTHIC __

Separate Effects Tests:

1. Wisconsin Condensation Tests

2. STC Flat Plate Evaporation Tests

3. Dry Free Convection Using Selected Literature Sources (e.g. Hugot, Siegel and Norris, ANL, Miyamoto, etc.)

4. STC Dry Forced Convection

5. Jet Comparisons Intearal Test Comparisons:

1. STC Small Scale (Integral) Tests

2. STC Large Scale Tests

3. NUPEC Tests M-4-3 and M-7-1 (ISP-35)

gny V. DETERMINE EFFECT OF H AND TRANSIENTS ON MODELS 2 ,.J HYDROGEN

1. Determine range of dimensionless parameters characterizing hydrogen in AP600.

2. Evaluate MIT, Wisconsin, and literature sources for hydrogen effect on models.

3. Verify model capability by WGOTHIC comparisons to LST.

TRANSIENTS

1. Determine range of dimensionless parameters characterizing transients in AP600.

2. Evaluate literature sources for transient effect on models.

3. Verify model capability by W_ GOTHIC comparisons to LST.

- g l e

l

- = d e

- 9

! - o h t

m e .

o d e

- t i d h t s o

- c u c a o e C o

r d h Rs Ng p e dt p t nh ,i n

a a at i Ct e d

e,w Re i

d Nm l

e a d d n v oe e s i

l p d n

cm er h

t u o

- i c a ho s t f miv

- i d

d e ne r oe r r l ip f p l

a d n d a

c c

s te o e v in i

d , nit i s

o d ea et cn h e t e mid ea t d c el a rt eo e l pv t u l

- mc l e mla us pn aC I s i r no gH e eg i nT r a r at e sC iO n eS k s si i dR rG o

l e

l e e ,

oC S wW d d v bA N

se o oi O

I ih m msn md e n S e tr l a dn l

e ha U s o ah cat s L uf u d a ue C o ,

dr ip on N hn go i

ve v r a O

i i

d do im d

pt pu l C

nt ia t I n c I n o c as sd i en 1 el ho T

R Wav - - TC

. A . .

P 1 2

mmw;g PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC __

• Most of the model development and validation activity completed since the March 1993 meeting, and currently underway can be summarized within the context of questions raised during the March 1993 meeting. These questions are:

1. Containment Heat Transfer Sensitivity to Liquid Film Uncertainty

2. Grashof Number Range and Length Parameter

3. McAdams Correlation for Horizontal Dome Surface

4. Liquid Film Flow Rate Dependence in STC Fiat Plate Evaporation Tests

5. Validate the Heat / Mass Transfer Analogy for the Dome

6. Effect of Fog on the Radiation Heat Transfer in the PCCS Air Gap

7. Evaporation vs Condensation: Mass Transfer Corrections

8. Jet Modeling and Break Location

9. Liquid film Stability

10. Local Comparisons

!$N5l PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _

Containment heat transfer sensitivity l

to liquid film uncertainty in AP600 at peak steady-state heat flux, h ,,,m;, > 900 B/hr-ft2 -F internal h on, h,,,,,,,,, h.,, h ,,,,,, ,, h ,,,,

h ,,,,,,, > 500 B/hr-ft2-F external Hot steam Cool Air h ,n = 192 h co ,o = 30 to 100 (

= 30 to 100 f

h,,,, ,

r N Y The total thermal resistance is thus:

h, ,,, = + + -

+ + = 35.31

,100 900 192 100 100 500, Using an uncertainty of 40% on the film heat transfer coefficient both inside and outside:

'I l'4 l l4 I

= 33.82 h* * - 100+ 900+ 192+ 500+100, The effect on containment heat transfer is proportional to the ratio of the heat transfer coefficients with and without uncertainties. The ratio is 0.958. The containment heat transfer will be reduced by 4.2% if the full liquid film uncertainty is applied.

CONCLUSION: The containment heat transfer is not sensitive to the uncertainty on the liquid film heat transfer coefficient.

QV"}"

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC .,..

GRASHOF NUMBER RANGE AND LENGTH PARAMETER The Grashof number in AP600 at the time of peak internal pressure is approximately 2x10". This is based on the Grashof number definition:

Gr = 00""'(P"'U"*}I'

('I p * ,,,,

and temperature measurements from LST 203.2.

Experimental measurements of Grashof numbers as high as 4x10" (Katoake, et. al.I") show that the Nusselt number can be related to Gr. Because the same length parameter appears in the Nusselt number to the first power, and in the Grashof number to the third power, the length cancels and the heat transfer coefficient is not a function of the length parameter at high Grashof numbers. Consequently, it is not significant what length parameter is used in the Grashof number for free convection in turbulent flow in either the air annulus or inside containment.

The independence of the heat transfer coefficient from a length parameter, for turbulent heat transfer on vertical surfaces longer than 2 to 3 feet, was persuasively argued by Jacob3 A Grashof number exponent of 1/3 is commonly used by many authors to represent the relationship to the Nussen number at high Grashof numbers.

CONCLUSION: Whether the analyst uses length or hydraulic diameter in the Grashof number will not affect the value of the heat transfer coefficient.

1. Y. Kataoka, T. Fujii, and M. Murase, " Heat Removal Capability and System Pressure of the Water-Wall Type Passive Containment Cooling System", ASME/JSME Nuclear Engineering Conference - Volume 1. ASME 1993.

2. M. Jacob, Heat Transfer, Volume I, John Wiley & Sons,1949, pp 526-534.

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC bl . , . . . .

McADAMS CORRELATION FOR HORIZONTAL DOME SURFACE The McAdams correlation for vertical surfaces with turbulent heat transfer:

Nut = 0.13(Grt Pr)"' (1) underpredicts the Vliet'4 test data for Gr < 2x10". The Vliet data, shown in Figure 1, cover plate inclinations from 30 to 85 degrees from horizontal. The above correlation also underpredicts the McAdams correlation for horizontal plates:

(2)

Nut = 0.14{Grt Pr}"'

Vliet correlated his data with the full gravitational acceleration, not the component parallel to the plate.

Kreith recommended Equation 1 for calculating free convection heat transfer to the inside of atmospheric balloons (50 < D < 400 ft). Although no local distribution information is available, data for laminar free convection over the outside of spheres shows little local Nusselt number variation between zero (the '

stagnation point) and 90 degrees.

CONCLUSION: The McAdams correlation for free convection on vertical plates is valid for use on the inner surface of the AP600 containment, for surfaces of any slope. The gravitational acceleration should be used in the Grashof number without correction for the angle.

1. G. C. Vliet," Natural Convection Local Heat Transfer on Constant-Heat Flux inclined Surfaces", Journal of Heat Transfer, November,1969, pp 511-516.

1 itswift!

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _

Vliet Test Data 3  ; -

10 -

rnor. EVALUATION AT Tn ' i/2 AT, A NCI.E 85 26 80 45 30 l Gr* = Gr Nu r i.25 o -i  ; i.. .

-v o i.i2 .i-t3'

" 0.3 . :-5

. :-2 . :-t . :-ii . :-it

$pprox.)

o.oS . :-s . :-4 . :-s . :-io . :-is

==Ani:t . . . . .

~

Air Data 2 4 2 - - _

10 A- A m -

W Nu = 0.302 (Gr*Pr)0.24 Y "#

9

- . (SOLID) m

• 4 i a a a l a e e a a a e a g>

$ 10 8

10 10 10 10 II

.g '

'

• 3 10 - BORIZONTAL SURF E (11] 10 Nu = 0.23 (cr*Pr) VIRTICAL PIATE [7]

IE - NI Nu* = 0 57 (Gr*Pr)

VNRTIC A L (DASHED) 6 PLATE (90*)

g- t 0.13 (Gr Pr)"' ,,

g. , . , , , , . . I . , , , . . . . . . . .io-Il I4 " '1 6 2 10 10 10 10 10 10 C#x "# Ra=1.7x10

Figure I. T-6.i..e . . c .. cts.. . . .es.. f., inci6..d = =f.c..

Ni@"

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _ _ -

LIQUID FILM FLOW RATE DEPENDENCE IN STC FLAT PLATE EVAPORATION TESTS The author's presentation of the STC flat plate mass transfer test results"3 did not show adequate agreement with the proposed correlation. The data appeared to deviate depending on the total film flow rate.

The correlation presented in the STC report did not include corrections for mass transfer and only accounted for the heat capacity of the liquid film in an approximate way. Figure 1 shows a comparison between the measurements and the proposed correlation, with corrections for rnass transfer and entrance effects applied.

The resulting deviation between the predictions and measurement is shown compared to the film flow rate in Figure 2, and a dimensionless ratio of the liquid film heat capacity to the total heat in Figure 3. The correlation with the energy fraction appears better, although neither shows a strong correlation.

STATUS: It was found that much of the unexplained variation in the STC report was due to the absence of mass transfer corrections. Multiple increment calculations produce better comparisons to integral measurements, as shown by our comparisons to the Wisconsin and Sherwood tests. Work is underway to model the STC flat plate tests using )YGOTHIC with the liquid film subcooled enthalpy model and several calculational increments.

1. W. A. Stewart, A. T. Pieczynski, L. E. Conway, " Tests of Heat Transfer and Water Film Evaporation on a Heated Plate Simulating Cooling of the AP600 Reactor Containment", September 8,1988,88-8E9-ADLWR-R3, (Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2).

~~nwm PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC WGOTHIC Mass Transfer Correlation Comparison to STC Mass Transfer Data Showing Reynolds Number Dependence _ g,9 u _.

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC Relationship Between Sherwood Numbers and Liquid Film Flow Rate for the STC Evaporation Tests 1.2 Preliminary P/M Average = 0 914, Std Dev = 0109 1.1 i

E O v

~

a SO o

O o

h 0.9- 8 5 O o

o 0

!0.8-5 i

0.7- a 0

0.6 250 3b0 350 50 1b0 1b0 20 Uguid Film Flow Rate, Exn/hr-ft Figure 2. Relationship Between Sherwood Numbers and Liiquid Film Flow Rate for the STC Evaporation Tests.

~

mmegil PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _

Relationship Between Sherwood Numbers and Liquid Film Energy Change for the STC Evaporation Tests 1.2 -

Preliminary a

1.1 e

o o Z

1 O

o O 0

o E o O E h 0.9-~

g o o O

E 0 5 a g 0.8-ti

} P/M Average = 0 914, Std Dev = 0.109 0.7 g o

0.6 - , i , .

-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 Fraction of Total Energy to Uquid Figure 3. Relationship Between Sherwood Numbers and Liiquid Film Energy Change for the STC Evaporation Tests.

nummml

~

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC m VAllDATE THE HEAT / MASS TRANSFER ANALOGY FOR THE DOME The validity of the heat transfer correlation for inclined surfaces is supported by comparison to the Vliet"3 test data and presented in response to another question.

The Wisconsin condensation test results t2 for mixed free and forced convection on inclined surfaces are shown in Figure 1 as a function of the inclination angle. The results show that condensation is underpredicted by approximately the same amount for all angles from 0 to 90 degrees.

CONCLUSION: The heat / mass transfer analogy is valid for'the dome.

. 1. G. C. Vliet, " Natural Convection Local Heat Transfer on Constant-Heat Flux inclined Surfaces", Journal of Heat Transfer, November,1969, pp 511-516.

2. 1. Huhtiniemi, A. Pernsteiner, M. L. Corradini, " Condensation in the Presence of a Noncondensible Gas: Experimental Investigation", April 1991, Final Report.

inniwqg PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _

WGOTHIC Mass Transfer Correlation Comparison to Wisconsin Test Data Showing inclination Dependence 2

Preliminary 1.8- Av rag ,P/M = o.7e, std Deviation = o.21 1.6-i j 1.4 --

u 8 1.2- x x x

! x E

3 D x x $

!3 X N

• 3 0.8x y h N X X

• 5 0.6x k N i M M

' O.4 0.2 --

0- , , , , . , , .

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Plate inclination from Horizontal (Deg)

WGOTHIC Mass Transfer Correlation Comparison to Wisconsin Test Data Showing inclination Dependence

MSW9l PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _

EFFECT OF FOG ON THE RADIATION HEAT TRANSFER IN THE PCCS AIR GAP An evaluation was performed to assess the effect of neglecting the presence of fog in the PCCS air gap on the containment heat transfer, the air temperature, and the baffle temperature.

The interaction of radiant energy with fog is a complicated problem and its calculation is not compatible with the boundary layer models used in WGOTHIC. Under the worst inlet temperature assumption for the SSAR containment calculations, the 115 F inlet temperature causes the local bulk humidity to remain below saturation throughout the air gap. Fog was observed in many of the Large Scale Tests which were conducted with inlet temperatures from 30 to 62 F.

The evaluation showed that in the worst case, fog could cause the containment heat rejection to be 5% less than predicted, and the PCCS air temperature to be 2 F greater than predicted by neglecting the presence of fog. Fog will reduce the energy deposited in the baffle, so neglecting fog results in overpredicting the baffle temperature.

CONCLUSION: Fog does not appear in the bulk PCCS air under the high inlet temperatures assumed for SSAR calculations. For the LST or more normal inlet conditions in AP600, fog may have a minor affect on the calculated containment heat transfer.

!= m una PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC _

EVAPORATION VS CONDENSATION: MASS TRANSFER CORRECTIONS The mass transfer correlation is valid for both evaporation and condensation as long as the appropriate mass transfer correction is applied. According to Bird, Stewart and Lightfoot"I, mass transfer necessitates corrections for momentum, heat and mass transfer at the surface. The appropriate correction factors for each of momentum, heat and mass transfer for the case with condensation or evaporation of a single vapor species in the presence of a noncondensible gas are:

I' = Of 0= $= (1) e' - 1 pv f/2 h," = Oh, 0= * $= a (2)

" ' " " ~ E' *"*

k,' = O k, 0 = I"IN

• 1) R= (3)

R P - p,,,,,s Note that equation 2 produces a heat transfer coefficient multiplier of 0 = 0.28 for evaporation and 2.4 for condensation at 10000 B/hr-f 2t -F and 10 ft/sec. For mass transfer the Equation 3 multiplier reduces to P/p ,,, on the conventional mass transfer coefficient, kg, and gives typical multipliers of 1.8,1.3 and 1.01 respectively for the Wisconsin, STC flat plate, and Sherwood tests.

Figure 1 presents the mass transfer comparisons with the multiplier equal to P/p m.

STATUS: Work is underway to compare various mass transfer corrections for separate effects tests and to apply those to the heat and mass transfer correlations in WGOTHIC.

1. R. B. Bird, W. E. Stewart, and E. N. Lightfoot, Transport Phenomena, John Wiley & Sons.

ll!F~9,l!

^".,. , l' i PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC WGOTHIC Mass Transfer Correlation Comparison to Wisconsin, STC and Sherwood Test Data Showing Reynolds Number Dependence (Multiplier equal to P/p .)

2 Preliminary

~

Mass Transfer Correction = P/PBm e 1.6 E

51.4- O g 5 ao 8 1.2- + 8 i +1*.+% b+ A Y

++ + ++ +

= 0.8 p x

?  %

$ 0.6- -

' O.4 0.2 -

0 i ,,iiiiii i . .iii,i, i i i iii,,

1000 10000 100000 1000000 Diameter Based Reynolds Number, Red

• Wisconsin Cond O STC Evap + Sherwood Evap Figure 1. WGOTHIC Mass Transfer Correlation Comparison to Wisconsin, STCand Sherwood Test Data Showing Reynolds Number Dependence

f)ilifKj" PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC ~.~,

JET MODELING AND BREAK LOCATION Work is underway to implement criteria and guidance provided by NAI in their GOTHIC documentation on nodalization and mixing lengths necessary for jet modeling. LST confirmatory and follow-on tests produced data for blow-down transients and steady-state operation with jets simulating breaks:

- in the steam generator compartment with the diffuser, at the top of the steam generator with and without the diffuser, pointed up, and at the top of the steam generator without the diffuser, pointed horizontally.

STATUS: Work is underway on jet scaling, modeling and comparisons with WGOTHIC.

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC LIQUID FILM STABILITY Wetting instability puts a lower limit on the thickness of a liquid film. A film which is too thin may separate into two thicker rivulets, or may contract until it's thickness is equal to the lower stability limit. Many authors have addressed liquid film stability and have proposed models to consider the effect of surface tension, heat flux, wetting angle, thermocapilarity, vapor thrust and inertia.

The model must produce agreement with the available body of test results with specific models for heated vs isothermal tests to allow extrapolation from the isothermal Wetting Distribution Tests to the heated AP600. In addition, the model must explain the following observations from the Westinghouse tests:

1. The addition of surfactant to the water in the Water Distribution Tests had little effect on the wetted coverage.

2. The Flat Plate Tests achieved complete wetted coverage at a flow rate of 60 lbm/hr-ft with 15 lbm/hr-ft evaporation.

3. The Large Scale Test achieved complete wetted coverage with 9000 lbm/hr water flow at cold isothermal conditions and a steam flow of 1600 lbm/sec. Complete coverage could not be achieved at 9000 lbm/hr water flow and 1800 lbm/hr steam flow (test 10/18/93).

mmm!j PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC __

LIQUID FILM ST/tBILITY (continued)

Investigations to date suggest that:

Vigorous mixing in the storage tank and the turbulent pumped application to the dome, may have prevented the surfactant from diffusing to the water surface where it must collect to be effective.

The porosity of the inorganic zinc coating causes capillary transport of water from the flowing film, through the thickness of the coating to produce a visibly wet surface a couple of inches wide for room temp evaporation and a couple of tenths of an inch for high LST heat fluxes.

The uniformity of the initial flow distribution is important to maximizing coverage.

STATUS: Work is underway to develop analytical models to relate tho isothermal, full scale wetting test results to the hot AP600.

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC LOCAL COMPARISONS Work is underway to present the.WGOTHIC models in the form of dimensionless comparisons of locally measured parameters.

HEAT TRANSFER: Figures 1 and 2 show the Eckert and Diaguila"3 dry convective heat transfer test measurements plotted as functions of the Reynolds number and Grashof numbers, respectively.

I LIQUID FILM: Figure 3 shows the local liquid film Nusselt numbers derived from the Wisconsin'l pure steam t

condensation tests t,ompared to the Chun and Seban'l wavy laminar film correlation.

MASS TRANSFER: In many cases investigators do not make local measurements. The tests reported by Gilliland and Sherwoodl *3 are a good example. Figure 4 shows the original comparison from which G&S concluder; that the Sherwood number correlation is:

Sh = 0.023 Re"'Sc'* (1)

The data were approximately 25% greater than the expected correlating function:

Sh = 0.023 Re"Sc'* (2) even with the P/ps, mass transfer correction.

l

PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC LOCAL COMPARISONS (continued)

I repeated the G&S calculations using the .W_ GOTHIC models for a 1 increment calculation and reproduced the G&S numbers almost exactly. (The value of M6am-air diffusion coefficient used by G&S was approximately 10% lower than currently accepted values.)(

the mass transfer gjyl found my predicted mass transfer to be .986 times the measured values with a standard

]fhe discrepancy in the G&S calculation was due to the use of an average evaporation flux in the Sherwood number calculation whereas the mass flux distribution was actually a log-mean function which reduced to approximately 10% of the inlet value at the outlet. Figure 5 compares the 1 step predicted / measured mass transfer with the 10 step calculations.

Although we can accurately calculate the measured results, a meaningful"overall" Sherwood number cannot be defined. The conclusion is that integral tests with significant internal variation cannot be represented by a sinale Sherwood number. Since local measurements were not made, only integral comparisons are possible.

One increment calculations for the Wisconsin tests produced an average of .814 with a 0.212 standard deviation; preliminary results from multiple step calculations give an average of .918 with a sicndard deviation of 0.253.

1. E. R. G. Eckert and A. J. Diaguila, " Convective Heat Transfer for Mixed Free, and Forced Flow Through Tubes",

Transactions of the ASME, May,1954, pp 497-504.

2. I. Huhtiniemi, A. Pernsteiner, M. L. Corradini, " Condensation in the Presence of a Noncondensible Gas:

Experimental Investigation", April 1991, Final Report.

3. R. K R. Chun and R. A. Seban, " Heat Transfer to Evaporating Liquid Films", Journal of Heat Transfer, November,1971. pp 391-396.

4. E. R. Gilbland and T. K. Sherwood, " Diffusion of Vapors into Air Streams", Industrial and Engineering Chemistry.

Vol. 26. No. 5, pp. 516-523.

j i

=: _

r e ,

b g

m .,

u N .

s .

n d

l

. o o e n . c C y n

- T e e S R .

d n 9 a n T e _

o p

A e 4 B -b 8 .

e D

G c 9 .

N I

n e

1 0

=

aa e8 t a E0 t e

a r

e T d l P

f s

E n @

t s n E e a a_! ;I5 i a

p d F r M e n o

)

de yr T

. S D y b u ag g mD r C t

a C r e

• = T r a a C f e n D S H P s W ,= .Mgr *= a n i

- S r g  :

C n m , s o _

R a i l . = ui a i t r e 4 ,

o u c N T t P r 2 9

0 8E9E8 .

n g y

e

. e v

3 a =

.n o n -

9 e = d n o 9

1 H @ c8a8 g .

a Cr e t,

H n d = . db o e g a em _

C

= i t a . E iu x .

R r A

c e

v A e

v a ao 85ga m

oMN gs M n .

nd M o i t

so l

- O C ins R d sy F e x

AeR S i M 1 N

O g e r

I n u T i t g S s i E i F s &

z

• R e 4

- U s 2 1 4

i i

~

1 O o 0 _

O A @$a. Ijgz 3 2

T R

A P_

, t ;

e Illl ik u l

.$ 0 E  :@

s -

Z o J G -

r D DO O -

0 00 8 O 0 C t- : b a l H 0 0 e l m e 0 l G k 0 0 O@ l 0 c & D g 3 . o 1

Z e -

O O O -

O o . m e

y c si O O OE -

2S u) 0 b O EW 55O

.gF O

(c 0 0 5 $NI c 3 -

8 O E j R O00 EO O$

C F _ ,- 0 0 Z - 3 g g g g g 00 0@

m I e 8 _:W}a v s 1 r c h O -

l U

)3y.8'

~

z o Y O O O

E 5G gs IbO -

.25 E l

I 4 g 4 0 _ O 23Z E o s

O o

o

[lO e  :% w $]

w Y 5 @

$ 'g m i  : $O W

8a

- C

$ E & i w a 4 u-4"om U 6 6 4 6 6 6 6 *W o

O - - - - - o o i sanpaJd 'spmN yessnN 1821 N

I 4

c.

ww+h PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC -_

Chun and Seban Liquid Film Nusselt Number Correlation Comparison to the Wisconsin Condensation Test Local Data

l i

! naqisi m-PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC __

Empirical Correlation of Turbulent Flow Data zoo - .

j l I nty -

4 - WAf tR g o - w-sur YL 4temOL i l f a - TotutNC , * #*

,og - - - - -

- - -- - I

• j'

, . ,u,tist -- '- ' - -

D - ISO-PROPYL ALCOMOL E-- ~'-'*-*

'- - '--- - ~ ~ '

/

SO '----

5 - SEC - AwYL ALCOHOL --

- *- - -- - - h . I / '"--

. . T - SCC-SUT7L ALCOHOL .__l-, -_.. ..

v - CatOaatuztut  : I '

-h/-  :

40

]/* ~ ~ ' e -

-- ~

^

m - t Ynyt ACCTATC i l g' e 4 La

..j.,[-__s._g.....__! / pr. ADAMS

\ l l , / HCAT T R ANST C R

" - - - * -** * ~ ~ ~ '

40 ' - -

/r

, If @D L yh

. .. . . . .*.f.

- i i

Pij touAnow or Liv.-

/

4.*f . / '.'f;-'- 1. Ontyt"m-t" 20 - - - - --

l .*

s - l

• f '

./ +

.I r '. *, *P I  !

f n

. */

/ I l I IO I e000 2000 4000 to00 4000 t0.000 2(LDOO 40000 dup M

Figure 4 Empirical Correlation of Turbulent Flow Data

i l

l PART 2 - QUESTIONS FROM MARCH 1993 NRC PCCS MEETING AT STC Predictions with 10 increments and 1 increment

- Compared to the Gilliland and Sherwood Evaporation Data -

(*,c)

lilill nr li!!!

i;]

t... .

WGOTHIC MODEL CHANGES APPLIED AFTER WCAP REVISION O

'i M. D. Kennedy

Containment and Radiological Analysis 1

mm=ttgg WGOTHIC PROGRAMMING CHANGES _

- Mixed Convection Model eliminates the need for the user to choose between free and forced convection Opposed free and forced convection:

h, = {hL+h&'is Assisting free and forced convection, h,is largest of the following:

abs (hh-hQ (3 0.75hw , 0.75h w

- Mass Transfer Model h,PMA ~ Pr

• m, = {p,,-p,)

p C,RTp,,, _ R

- Film Stripping to model disruption of film on the inside of the vessel (caused by gutters) without disrupting film on the outside of vessel

!!!Pt=*tt WGOTHIC PROGRAMMING CHANGES =

- Entrance Effect for Heat / Mass Transfer Coefficients

- Model higher heat transfer coefficients which exist at the entrance of the air annulus

- Entrance effects are a characteristic of the tests, and it is modelled to reduce uncertainty in test predictions

- Entrance effects have negligible impact on heat transfer for AP600

- Restart Capability to facilitate long containment transient

- Subcooled Film Enthalpy Transport Model heating of external water Small effect on AP600 heat removal Larger effect on the test heat removal, and it is modelled to reduce uncertainty in the test predictions

- User Friendly Options

- Nondimensional numbers output Preprocessor Enhancements

WGOTHIC PROGRAMMING CHANGES -

TEST ANALYSIS INPUT AND MODELLING TECHNIQUE IMPROVEMENTS

- Utilize Programming Changes identified Previously

- Use Flat Plate Heat Transfer Correlation inside Vessel for Forced Convection

- Distributed Parameter / Subdivided Formulation to validate code's ability to predict hydrogen distribution

- Use Finer Noding in the vessel to better model gradients

.- . .. . .. . ..=.-.- -. .. . . - -.. ... ._ .. . - . _. . . _ . _ - . - . . - _ - . - . - - . _ . .

manunna:

WGOTHIC VALIDATION M. D. Kennedy Containment and Radiological Analysis

iisi-iiii!'

WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION -

- Specify phenomena to be modeled

- Select analytically valid model

- Verify Scalability of models:

- Determine range of relevant dimensionless groups Collect separate effects data sets and perform comparisons

- Verify that models in WGOTHIC can represent the passive containment phenomena at different scales and be applied to the AP600

- Collect separate effects data sets and perform compariscas with WGOTHIC models Perform integral test comparisons with WGOTHIC

- Determine the effect of hydrogen and transients on the models

_ - - . .. .- . - - _ - - .. - - - - . - - . . . - . - = .

girmiig WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION 1."

SEPARATE EFFECTS TESTS

- Wisconsin Condensation Tests

- STC Flat Plate Dnf and Evaporation Tests

- Dry Free Convection Heat Transfer Comparisons Using Selected Literature Sources (for exampic Hugot, Siegel and Norris, ANL, Miyamoto, etc.)

- Jet. Comparisons

pr,qg WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION T!

r INTEGRAL TESTS ANALYSIS STATUS

- Completed and Reported in WCAP, Rev. 0:

Small Scale Tests Large Scale Tests without internals

- On Going:

Large Scale Tests with internals, helium addition, and transients with blowdowns Blind Test Analysis Process - transient with blowdown

WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION . .

l GOTHIC QUALIFICATION REPORT TEST COMPARISONS

- BFMC tests D-1, D-15, D Blowdown pressure / temperature tests

- BFMC test - 6,12,20 - Hydrogen mixing tests

- BFMC C-13,15 - Steamline break compartment response

- HEDL Tests HM-1 through 7 - LOCA with hydrogen release tests

- LACE tests - Aerosol behavior tests

- MARVIKEN Tests - Full scale steam / water blowdown into containment

- CVTR Tests - Full scale DBA tests

- HDR Tests - Steam / Water blowdown with hydrogen

WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION CODE INPUT PARAMETERS

- Literature sources are used to determine input parameters such as loss coefficients, entrance effects, mixing length, material properties

- Noding guidelines determined from noding sensitivities performed on LST Model

- Base Case WGOTHIC model is developed

- Basis for all input parameters clearly established

- for different LST test runs, boundary conditions are changed other parameters would only be changed consistent with noding requirements for jets

-> i.e. changes in steam supply orientation / location / velocity

-> such input changes will be clearly identified

q .'

. l e i a

w h x t a

- h t d c n i p

i h l i e a w a d r t

i c a r y a i f

i g l e

ntc t r n i v

id oi a i o t a _

t a er t a

t a

l e

vp e

h t t r r n e o

l edn s e

c ht h

ea a n l e

t t n e o d r c o we a l l om t e d e m en j o o bia r e m t

t st n ht d u o e j e n t d e a y e l

a h h r e i

t t t a n nl r s e ee e s r sd g e a so r c _

a e k -

em l

n c s o e e _

io n r d _

ntr e a g i

o e b l l

n t i c dr a t N e r o d

l w ar n t

O i dn u

o e e pd e

i -

I i h _

T l t

h s

t oar A a c nn t g eg ieo e n h D t rmi a t j o t el I

L e vic n ed l an wb A S ai f he t c si o os i E et hnt i

hu et d a l

e n _

V I ora t d be _

o s t _

T s dn in n cts wi n n I

L V n ocon i

e e E I T gh e eto n

l l d _

D I S nt b l

in an i t .

O N i

dsis l

ni s mo ave no .

E o r en s c .

y y i

M nt e a gn ei n l _

S b de nd l -

n ei e C G e l -

e rd a vd a r g -

I H

N imo c l

a ie t

a s en I

D ta ea n e

de ir l u va T O Dsn t o Gs r p Rc ea Sc eh O N G T S _

W L - - - -

WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION ..

BLIND TEST PROCESS Stage 1 - Baseline Computer Code Models (WCAP, Rev.0)

Stage 2 - Test Analysis / Computer Model Validation (Ongoing)

Stage 3 - Blind Test Prediction Stage 4 - Evaluation of Prediction Stage 5 - Computer Model Update (Plan Assumes not Necessary)

Stage 6 - Blind Test Report

!mn==ll

=

WGOTHIC MODEL VALIDATION - -

A COMPREHENSIVE VERIFICATION OF CODE MODELS l

- Separate effects tests isolate particular phenomena to validate the individual code models

- Validate computer code with integral effects tests

- Tests include integral effects of significant containment physics, such as internal flow field, steam delivery characteristics, compartments, long & short term heat sinks, exterior water film evaporation and air cooling heat removal

- Demonstrate that models in code work well for integral tests

- Show that code predicts internal flow field well (for example, internal temperature and noncondensible distributions, axial wall temperatures, local bulk velocities)

- Application to AP600 Can use computer code to scale up from integral test to AP600

i l

t mi-m..

! PCCS TEST ANALYSIS RAI

SUMMARY

M. D. Kennedy Containment and Radiological Analysis

l l

inni ii;;

l PCCS TEST ANALYSIS RAI

SUMMARY

RAl# SUBJECT 480.2 Mechanistic Heat / Mass Transfer Correlations 480.4 Dry Shell LST and SST Data 480.8 Natural Circulation of Air in the PCCS 480.9 HT to Internal Structures and Mixing in the Containment 480.10 Jet Discharge: Location / Orientation / Scaling 480.11 1/8 Scale Facility Instrumentation 480.12 1/8 Scale Facility Test Matrix 480.13 Westinghouse Scaling Approach' 480.14 Mechanistic Correlations in WGOTHIC' 480.15 WGOTHIC Validation Using Test Data' 480.16 WGOTHIC Numerics' 480.17 External Film Pattern / Water Distribution Tests

• 480.18 Degree of " Rain"in the AP600 Containment 480.32 Hydrogen Control-Prediction of Hydrogen Distribution 951.2 WGOTHIC Condensation Model

' To be addressed in WCAP-13246, Rev.1 2 To be addressed further in an RAI revision

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ . _ _ . - _ - _ _ - - _ - _ - _ _ - - _ . ____-____ - ___-___-_____